Dataset Information

Trends in prescribing pattern of opioid and benzodiazepine substitutes among Medicare part D beneficiaries from 2013 to 2018: a retrospective study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Opioid and benzodiazepine co-prescribing is associated with a substantial increase in opioid overdose deaths. In this study, we examine the prescribing trends of substitutes of opioids and benzodiazepines alone or in combination, compared with opioids and benzodiazepines.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

Data were collected using a 20% national sample of Medicare beneficiaries from 2013 to 2018.

Participants

4.1-4.3 million enrollees each year from 2013 to 2018.

Intervention

None.

Primary outcome

We employ a generalised linear mixed models to calculate ORs for opioid use, benzodiazepine or Z-drug (benzos/Z-drugs) use, opioid/benzos/Z-drugs 30-day use, gabapentinoid use and (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs)) use, adjusted for the repeated measure of patient. We then created two models to calculate the ORs for each year and comparing to 2013.

Results

Opioid and benzos/Z-drugs use decreased by 2018 (aOR 0.626; 95% CI 0.622 to 0.630) comparing to 2013. We demonstrate a 36.3% and 9.9% increase rate of gabapentinoid and SSRI/SNRI use, respectively. Furthermore, combined gabapentinoid and SSRI/SNRI use increased in 2018 (aOR 1.422; 95% CI 1.412 to 1.431).

Conclusion

Little is known about the prescribing pattern and trend of opioid and benzodiazepine alternatives as analgesics. There is a modest shift from prescribing opioid and benzos/Z-drugs (alone or in combination) towards prescribing non-opioid analgesics-gabapentinoids with and without non-benzos/Z-drugs that are indicated for anxiety. It is unclear if this trend towards opioid/benzos/Z-drugs alternatives is associated with fewer drug overdose death, better control of pain and comorbid anxiety, and improved quality of life.

SUBMITTER: Esechie A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8603279 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceIn response to the opioid epidemic, policies aiming to reduce opioid prescribing, misuse, and abuse may have the unintended consequence of restricting access to necessary opioid therapy for cancer-related pain. It is unknown how opioid prescribing patterns have changed among generalists and oncologists during this era.ObjectiveTo examine trends in opioid prescription rates for Medicare Part D beneficiaries from 2013 to 2017 among oncologists and generalists.Design, setting, and participantsThis repeated cross-sectional study of generalist physicians (internal medicine, family medicine, geriatric medicine, general practice) and oncology specialists (medical oncology, hematology-oncology, and radiation oncology) analyzed the Medicare Provider Utilization and Payment Data: Part D prescriber files from 2013 to 2017.ExposuresGeneralist vs oncology specialty.Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes included physician-level rates of both opioid and long-acting opioid prescriptions per 100 Medicare Part D beneficiaries. Poisson regression was used to estimate annual predicted outcome rates and incidence rate ratios, adjusting for prescriber characteristics and state fixed effects.ResultsWe analyzed the prescribing patterns of 251 820 generalists and 14 210 oncologists. From 2013 to 2017, the annual adjusted predicted mean rate of opioid prescriptions per 100 Medicare beneficiaries decreased from 68.2 to 49.7 among generalists (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.73-0.73) and from 77.8 to 58.8 among oncologists (aIRR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.74-0.77). The rate of long-acting opioid prescriptions per 100 Medicare beneficiaries also decreased from 8.0 to 5.4 for generalists (aIRR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.66-0.68) and from 18.6 to 13.3 for oncologists (aIRR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.69-0.74).Conclusions and relevanceWe found large declines in opioid prescription rates for Medicare beneficiaries by generalists and oncologists from 2013 to 2017. Opioid policy and advocacy appear to have been effective in reducing the extent of opioid prescribing in the Medicare population. Similar declines between generalists and oncologists raise concern that access to cancer pain management may have been inadvertently restricted. How much of the decrease in prescribing by oncologists is appropriate vs inappropriate deserves further investigation.

Project description:ImportanceConcurrent benzodiazepine use is associated with an increased risk of opioid-related overdose; however, it remains unknown how the overdose risk varies with the days of exposure to both medications.ObjectiveTo evaluate the exposure-response association between the days with concurrent prescription opioid and benzodiazepine use and the risk of overdose.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study of Medicare Part D claims data from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2014. Analyses were conducted in fall 2017 and spring 2018. Participants were Medicare Part D beneficiaries who filled at least 1 prescription for an opioid in 2014.ExposuresPatients were divided into 2 groups based on whether they had opioid and benzodiazepine supplies on the day before overdose or censoring. The first group only had a supply of opioids (n?=?50?583) and the second group had supplies of opioids and benzodiazepines (n?=?20?665). The second group was further categorized into 4 subgroups based on the cumulative number of days with overlapping supplies of opioids and benzodiazepines: 1 to 90 days (n?=?3603), 91 to 180 days (n?=?2930), 181 to 270 days (n?=?4082), and 271 days or more (n?=?10?050).Main outcomes and measuresCox proportional hazard models were constructed to compare opioid-related overdose (including fatal and nonfatal overdoses) across time-dependent treatment groups, controlling for demographic characteristics, insurance factors, clinical characteristics, and number of unique opioid and benzodiazepine prescribers.ResultsOf 71?248 total participants, 25?600 (35.9%) were male and 59?532 (83.6%) were white. Mean (SD) age was 66.5 (14.8) years. On the day before overdose or censoring event, 20?665 of 71?248 patients with an opioid prescription (29.0%) were concurrently using benzodiazepines and 14?132 of 20?665 concurrent users (68.4%) had more than 180 days of overlapping supplies of both medications. The risk of overdose was highest on the first days of concurrent opioid and benzodiazepine use and decreased over time; compared with opioid use alone, the hazard ratio for overdose was 5.05 (95% CI, 3.68-6.93) during the first 90 days of concurrent opioid and benzodiazepine use and 1.87 (95% CI, 1.25-2.80) for days 91 to 180 among those who did not have an event before 90 days.Conclusions and relevanceDuring the first 90 days, concurrent benzodiazepine use is associated with a 5-fold increase in the risk of opioid-related overdose. The implementation of policies deterring concurrent opioid and benzodiazepine use is warranted. Patients using both medications should be closely monitored, particularly during the first days of concurrent use.

Project description:Importance:Although there are many pharmacologic alternatives to opioids, it is unclear whether the structure of Medicare Part D formularies discourages use of the alternatives. Objectives:To quantify the coverage of opioid alternatives and prevalence of prior authorization, step therapy, quantity limits, and tier placement for these drugs, and test whether these formulary exclusions and restrictions are associated with increased opioid prescribing to older adults at the county level. Design, Setting, and Participants:County fixed-effect models were estimated using a panel of counties across the 50 US states and the District of Columbia over calendar years 2015 and 2016. Data analysis was conducted from July 1 to September 23, 2019. The sample included 2721 counties in 2015 and 2671 counties in 2016 with sufficient data on Medicare Part D formulary design and opioid prescribing. Main Outcomes and Measures:County-level opioid prescribing rate (number of opioid claims divided by the number of overall claims) and counts of excluded opioid alternatives and opioid alternatives with prior authorization, step therapy, quantity limits, and high-tier placements. Results:A total of 30 nonopioid analgesics were examined across 28 997 Medicare plans in 2015 and 30 390 plans in 2016. Medicare plans did not cover a mean of 7% of these drugs (interquartile range, 10%; lower to upper limit, 0%-23%). Among covered nonopioids, prior authorization and step therapy were uncommon, with fewer than 5% affected by prior authorization and 0% by step therapy. However, 13% of covered nonopioids had quantity limits (interquartile range, 10%; lower to upper limit, 0%-31%) and 22% were in high-cost tiers (interquartile range, 38%; lower to upper limit, 0%-50%). Increases in the number of nonopioids excluded on Medicare plans in a county were associated with increased opioid prescribing (effect size relative to mean, 2.2%-3.7%; P = .004). Conversely, increases in the number of opioids not covered on Medicare plans in a county was found to be associated with decreased opioid prescribing (effect size relative to mean, 0.8%-1.5%; P = .02). None of the utilization management strategies (prior authorization, step therapy, and quantity limits) examined or high-cost tier placements of nonopioids were associated with increased opioid prescribing. Conclusions and Relevance:Lack of Medicare coverage for pharmacologic alternatives to opioids may be associated with increased opioid prescribing.

Project description:Importance:Benzodiazepines, which are associated with safety-related harms for older adults, were not covered when the US Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit began. Coverage was extended to benzodiazepines in 2013. Objective:To examine whether the expansion of benzodiazepine coverage among Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries was associated with increases in fall-related injuries or overdoses among older adults. Design, Setting, and Participants:This ecological study used interrupted time-series with comparison-series analyses of MA claims data from 4?635?312 age-eligible MA beneficiaries and 940?629 commercially insured individuals (comparison group) stratified by age (65-69, 70-74, 75-79, and ?80 years) to separately compare trends in fall-related injury and overdose before (January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2012) and after (January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2015) coverage expansion for benzodiazepines. Data analysis was performed from September 1, 2018, to August 31, 2019. Exposures:Expansion of benzodiazepine coverage in Medicare Part D in 2013. Main Outcomes and Measures:Monthly rate of fall-related injury and overdose. Results:In 2012 (the year before the policy change), women constituted 57.5% of the MA group and 47.4% of the comparison group. A total of 25.8% of individuals in the MA group were aged 65 to 69 years, and 29.3% were 80 years or older (mean [SD], 75.1 [6.4] years); 56.7% of individuals in the comparison group were aged 65 to 69 years, and 15.1% were 80 years or older (mean [SD] age, 70.9 [6.5] years). In the MA group, 4?635?312 individuals contributed 156?754?749 person-months from 2010 through 2015; in the comparison group, 940?629 individuals contributed 25?104?534 person-months. After coverage of benzodiazepines began, the rate (ie, slope) of fall-related injury among MA beneficiaries increased from before to after coverage among all age groups. Compared with the comparison group, the increase in rate was statistically significant for those 80 years or older (rate changes for the MA vs comparison groups: 0.12 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.17] vs -0.01 [95% CI, -0.11 to 0.10]; P?=?.04 for interaction). The overdose trend changed from decreasing to increasing among MA beneficiaries after coverage for all age groups, with a statistically significant increase compared with the comparison group among those aged 65 to 69 years (rate changes for the MA vs comparison groups: 0.23 [95% CI, 0.17 to 0.30] vs 0.02 [95% CI, -0.06 to 0.11]; P?<?.001 for interaction) and among those 80 years or older (rate changes for the MA vs comparison groups: 0.07 [95% CI, 0.00 to 0.14] vs -0.20 [95% CI, -0.35 to -0.05]; P?=?.002 for interaction). Results among MA beneficiaries were consistent when stratified by sex and when limited to those prescribed opioids. Conclusions and Relevance:Medicare's expansion of benzodiazepine coverage may have been associated with increases in the rates of overdose among adults ages 65 to 69 years and in the rates of overdose and fall-related injury among those 80 years or older.

Project description:Use of opioids during and shortly after an acute hospitalization is warranted in some clinical settings. However, given the potential of opioids for short-term adverse events and long-term physiologic tolerance, it is important to understand the frequency of opioid prescribing at hospital discharge, hospital variation, and patient and hospital factors associated with opioid prescribing, which is currently unknown in the United States.To estimate the frequency of opioid prescribing at hospital discharge among Medicare beneficiaries without an opioid prescription claim 60 days prior to hospitalization; to document hospital variation in prescribing; and to analyze patient and hospital factors associated with prescribing, including hospital average performance on pain-related Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) measures.Analysis of pharmacy claims of a 20% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized in 2011 without an opioid prescription claim in the 60 days before hospitalization.Our main outcome was a new opioid claim within 7 days of hospital discharge. We estimated a multivariable linear probability model of patient factors associated with new opioid use and described hospital variation in adjusted rates of new opioid use. In multivariable linear regression analysis, we also analyzed hospital factors associated with average adjusted new opioid use at the hospital level, including the percentage of each hospital's patients who reported that their pain during hospitalization was always well controlled in the 2011 HCAHPS surveys.Among 623?957 hospitalizations, 92?882 (14.9%) were associated with a new opioid claim. Among those hospitalizations with an associated opioid claim within 7 days of hospital discharge, 32?731 (42.5%) of 77?092 were associated with an opioid claim after 90 days postdischarge. Across 2512 hospitals, the average adjusted rate of new opioid use within 7 days of hospitalization was 15.1% (interquartile range, 12.3%-17.4%; interdecile range, 10.5%-20.0%). A hospital's adjusted rate of new opioid use was modestly positively associated with the percentage of its inpatients reporting that their pain was always well managed (increase from 25th to the 75th percentile in the HCAHPS measure was associated with an absolute increase in new opioid use of 0.89 percentage points or a relative increase of 6.0%; P?<?.001).New opioid use after hospitalization is common among Medicare beneficiaries, with substantial variation across hospitals and a large proportion of patients using a prescription opioid 90 days after hospitalization. The degree to which observed hospital variation in short- and longer-term opioid use reflects variation in inappropriate prescribing at hospital discharge is unknown.

Project description:BackgroundPrescribing of medications with anticholinergic properties in older nursing home residents is relatively common, despite an association with an increased risk for falls, delirium, and other outcomes. Few studies have investigated what factors influence different levels of prescribing of these agents.ObjectivesThe primary objective was to identify factors associated with low- and high-level anticholinergic burden in nursing home residents. A secondary objective was to examine in detail the contribution of different medications to low versus high burden to aid in determining which drugs to target in interventions.MethodsThis was a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of a national sample of 2009-2010 Medicare Part A and B claims, Part D prescription drug events, and Minimum Data Set (MDS) v2.0 assessments. The cohort included 4730 Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 years with continuous Medicare Parts A, B, and D enrollment, admitted for non-skilled stays of ≥ 14 days between 1 January 2010 and 30 September 2010. Anticholinergic burden was defined using the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden (ACB) scale. Medication scores were summed at the patient level and categorized as high (score ≥ 3), low (score 1-2), or none. Baseline predisposing factors (age, sex, race/ethnicity), enabling factors (prior year hospitalization, emergency department, primary care, specialist visits; region; Medicaid/low-income subsidy), and medical need factors (dementia severity, anti-dementia medication, Charlson co-morbidity index [CCI], select comorbidities) were evaluated for association with anticholinergic burden using multinomial logistic regression.ResultsOverall, 29.6% of subjects had a high anticholinergic burden and 35.2% had a low burden. High burden was most often (72%) due to one highly anticholinergic medication rather than a cumulative effect. In adjusted analyses, factors associated with increased risk of both low and high anticholinergic burden included comorbidity, antidementia medication, depression, hypertension, and prior year hospitalization. Older age was associated with decreased odds of high anticholinergic burden. Urinary incontinence and prior year specialist visit were associated with increased odds of high anticholinergic burden. Severe and nonsevere dementia were associated with decreased odds of low burden but increased odds of high burden.ConclusionAlmost two-thirds of nursing home patients have some degree of anticholinergic burden. Several medical need variables are significantly associated with increased risk for low and high anticholinergic burden. Interventions should be developed to optimize prescribing for residents at increased risk of receiving medications with anticholinergic properties. Future study is needed to evaluate the difference in the risk of adverse outcomes associated with various levels of anticholinergic burden.